To: LTK007 who wrote (81810 ) 9/16/2001 12:11:08 PM From: KymarFye Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 99985 I don't want to offend anyone by offering comparisons of the events of last Tuesday to great wartime catastrophes in the history not just of the United States but of the world. That discussion can be saved for a later day, when time and events have perhaps given us more perspective and more reason for it. Suffice it to say, such mass atrocities are aimed at our psyches, but do not and cannot in themselves amount to real threats either to our national survival or even, unless we allow them to be, to our way of life. As for your other statements, I don't think I was being "blase"--I was attempting to respond to what seemed to me to be unjustified and unwelcome defeatism. Nor do I think "this is [a] piece of cake"--among other things, such a position would be an insult to the men and women who are even now working night and day and risking their lives both to deal with the disaster itself and the existing threat, and even more so to those who I do not doubt will be called on to risk their lives in battle at some point in the future. I'm also well aware, as I think we all are, of the possibility that the events last Tuesday may not amount to the worst losses we suffer before we've eradicated the immediate threat. And I also worry that, even if we achieve success against Al Qaida and its fellow travelers, it will remain difficult for us to define "victory." All that said, I remain confident that our capabilities against this specific threat are much greater and multivarious than many recognize. I also disagree with the perspective offered by the theorists that another contributor posted here - that the US is somehow particularly ill-suited to fight this enemy. To the contrary, our capacities in information technology and electronic warfare are extremely well-suited to the central tasks, and have shown themselves to be so already, even while constrained by political and budgetary constraints that may soon fade from memory: The attacks last Tuesday were not, by far, the first attempts at terorristic mass murder focused around high-profile symbolic objectives in the US or Europe - the attacks were simply the first successful ones. I agree that special forces "commando units" will likely have a role to play, and what they can achieve, if fully supported and freed from "peacetime" constraints, should not be underestimated. There are other weapons, including especially non-lethal ones, that the US military has been researching and developing for decades. (One small example: As I write this, ABC reporter John McWethy happens to be discussing the use of cyberwarfare against recalcitrant governments and financial institutions.) Don't forget that, prior to the Gulf War, very few people were aware that our pilots could guide a bomb right through the window of a targeted facility. Most observers were amazed - and that was '70s technology. As for the Gulf War, we could argue about whether or not the operation was a success, a qualified success, or, as you suggest, a "fundamental failure." We cannot know what would have happened if we had gone to Baghdad and sought Saddam - whether, for instance, we'd still have a beleaguered occupation force there today, or to what extent and in what ways our former allies would have turned against us. As a wise man once said, "History does not reveal its alternatives." I fully agree with you about Falwell and Robertson. They have disgraced themselves this week, and may never recover.